Hi Kate, While I can't tell you what individual schools are doing about RDA, I can tell you that it is here and here to stay... at least for the time being.
I believe that Follett and other vendors are looking into how to make the transition as easy as possible for the building level librarians. Having said that, yes, there might be a change in how you think about your materials but the hope is that the change is for the better. A big problem with RDA is that professional catalogers are still wrestling with this new framework themselves so they are not very good at explaining it to the "as needed" catalogers. Part of the problem is that the current conveyor of the data (MARC) doesn't really play well with RDA. This means that while they are still trying to figure out how RDA is impacting the data they are creating, they are also working on a new means of organizing that data. When the dust settles, this will probably be one of the biggest paradigm shifts in cataloging since the introduction of MARC. Schools can't ignore it but they might not feel a big impact just yet.
Theoretically, the purpose of RDA is (as you mentioned) to create links to different versions of the same work. Think the paperback edition of The Cat in the Hat, the hardback edition, and the movie with Mike Myers. Sounds like a great idea, right? I mean we've kind of been tossing that problem back and forth for a long time. So yay for us! Unfortunately theory is sometimes hard to put into practice.
Without getting into my presentations about RDA, I will try to put into a nutshell (like sunflower seed size) what I think school librarians need to be aware of right now: Follett and others have already made changes to the MARC record. Most obvious is the inclusion of what one might call material type fields. The fields are numbers 336, 337, and 338. When we can finally link all of our Cat in the Hat materials, these will be very cool fields to have because we will know right away that the library has two books and one movie of The Cat in the Hat. You can see the fields and the codes used in these fields if you go to the Library of Congress MARC Bibliographic page: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd3xx.html
The other thing you may notice is information about authors and illustrators that was only sometimes included in the catalog record. This added information has always been there but we have never paid much attention to it. If you look at the MARC record you might see something like 100 1 _ $aSmith, Tom.$eauthor. It is the $e that we are paying more attention to. The reason for this has to do with linking like materials. Let's go back to The Cat in the Hat. We all agree that Dr. Seuss is the author of the paperback and hard back copies. BUT what about the movie? Wouldn't you say that the screen play writers are the real "authors" of the movie. I am very sure that Dr. Seuss would completely disavow his relationship to it! So that $e is important in that it will help us to understand the roles of the various creators of the content of the work that is in our hands; especially when we FINALLY get rid of the 100 field and everything about the creators ends up in the 7XX part of the record (I keep hoping that will happen but I am no longer holding my breath). The Library of Congress does provide some help in how to fill out that $e but right now it is a little bit of a moving target.
I know it doesn't help much to know that even the experts are still messing around with the concepts in RDA but at least you know that if you are confused, you are in good company. For the "as needed" cataloger, I think you need to know that you will be seeing new fields but that the vendors are trying to make it easy to fill in those fields. Just make sure you do fill them in! For the person who does all of the cataloging, there is a bigger mountain to climb. We can't ignore this as we did MARC (remember MicroLif?) because the systems are changing too fast. Don't panic, but don't ignore it either.
If you have other questions, I'm happy to field them as best as I can. Hope this helps! Allison
Areas we will look at in RDA for your last assignment
The relationship designator
Transcription of the information
Capitalization will reflect how the information was presented originally
Abbreviations will be generally spelled out
copyright symbol
Three new MARC fields: 336, 337, and 338 which will replace 245 $h General Materials Designation
The blog "attempts to bring together at one place all the useful and important information, rules, references, news, and links on Resource Description and Requirements..."
McCutcheon, Sevim. "Resource Description & Access (RDA) Basics for Copy Catalogers." YouTube. 3 Sept. 2013. Web. 12 Aug. 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IUyBaDdc8c>.
Schultz-Jones, Barbar and Richard Hasenyager. "The Twilight of AACR2 and the Breaking Dawn of RDA: Presentation for ALA Annual 2013." American Library Association. 2013. PowerPoint File. 3 March 2014. <http://connect.ala.org/node/210316>.
AACR2
- "AACR2." (Cooperative Cataloging Rules) https://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/aacr2-chapter-1
- "AACR2 Outline." (Cooperative Cataloging Rules) https://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/library-of-congress-rule-interpretations
- "AACR2 - Rule Interpretations." (Library and Archives Canada) http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/6/18/s18-204-e.html
- "AACR2 Abbreviation Listing." (Memorial University of Newfoundland) http://staff.library.mun.ca/staff/toolbox/abbrev.htm
- "AACR2: Access Points (Queen's Library University) http://library.queensu.ca/techserv/cat/Sect02a/c02a2.html.
- "AACR2: Descriptive Cataloguing for Monographs." (Queen's Library University) <http://library.queensu.ca/techserv/cat/Sect02/c02a2.html>.
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=F-1euIEJBykC&oi=fnd&pg=PR8&dq=aacr2&ots=s5wNNsrHSy&sig=Nxk12-7-JGn6ctzJbI6vIS4sD3I#v=onepage&q=aacr2&f=false
==
RDA (Resource Description and Access)
A posting from an AASL discussion list:
Hi Kate,
While I can't tell you what individual schools are doing about RDA, I can tell you that it is here and here to stay... at least for the time being.
I believe that Follett and other vendors are looking into how to make the transition as easy as possible for the building level librarians. Having said that, yes, there might be a change in how you think about your materials but the hope is that the change is for the better. A big problem with RDA is that professional catalogers are still wrestling with this new framework themselves so they are not very good at explaining it to the "as needed" catalogers. Part of the problem is that the current conveyor of the data (MARC) doesn't really play well with RDA. This means that while they are still trying to figure out how RDA is impacting the data they are creating, they are also working on a new means of organizing that data. When the dust settles, this will probably be one of the biggest paradigm shifts in cataloging since the introduction of MARC. Schools can't ignore it but they might not feel a big impact just yet.
Theoretically, the purpose of RDA is (as you mentioned) to create links to different versions of the same work. Think the paperback edition of The Cat in the Hat, the hardback edition, and the movie with Mike Myers. Sounds like a great idea, right? I mean we've kind of been tossing that problem back and forth for a long time. So yay for us! Unfortunately theory is sometimes hard to put into practice.
Without getting into my presentations about RDA, I will try to put into a nutshell (like sunflower seed size) what I think school librarians need to be aware of right now:
Follett and others have already made changes to the MARC record. Most obvious is the inclusion of what one might call material type fields. The fields are numbers 336, 337, and 338. When we can finally link all of our Cat in the Hat materials, these will be very cool fields to have because we will know right away that the library has two books and one movie of The Cat in the Hat. You can see the fields and the codes used in these fields if you go to the Library of Congress MARC Bibliographic page: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd3xx.html
The other thing you may notice is information about authors and illustrators that was only sometimes included in the catalog record. This added information has always been there but we have never paid much attention to it. If you look at the MARC record you might see something like 100 1 _ $aSmith, Tom.$eauthor. It is the $e that we are paying more attention to. The reason for this has to do with linking like materials. Let's go back to The Cat in the Hat. We all agree that Dr. Seuss is the author of the paperback and hard back copies. BUT what about the movie? Wouldn't you say that the screen play writers are the real "authors" of the movie. I am very sure that Dr. Seuss would completely disavow his relationship to it! So that $e is important in that it will help us to understand the roles of the various creators of the content of the work that is in our hands; especially when we FINALLY get rid of the 100 field and everything about the creators ends up in the 7XX part of the record (I keep hoping that will happen but I am no longer holding my breath). The Library of Congress does provide some help in how to fill out that $e but right now it is a little bit of a moving target.
I know it doesn't help much to know that even the experts are still messing around with the concepts in RDA but at least you know that if you are confused, you are in good company. For the "as needed" cataloger, I think you need to know that you will be seeing new fields but that the vendors are trying to make it easy to fill in those fields. Just make sure you do fill them in!
For the person who does all of the cataloging, there is a bigger mountain to climb. We can't ignore this as we did MARC (remember MicroLif?) because the systems are changing too fast. Don't panic, but don't ignore it either.
If you have other questions, I'm happy to field them as best as I can.
Hope this helps!
Allison
Areas we will look at in RDA for your last assignment
FOLLETT/DESTINY RDA DISCUSSION
GENERAL RDA DISCUSSION